Department of Otolaryngology, Sawanpracharak Hospital, Ministry of Public Health, Nakhon Sawan, Thailand.
Center of Excellence in Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Rajavithi Hospital, Rangsit University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Sep;277(9):2463-2467. doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-06005-8. Epub 2020 May 3.
Endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation (ESPAL) is known as an effective treatment for posterior epistaxis. Anatomical variations of the intranasal branching may result in long operative time and possible inadequate cauterization. A modification of ESPAL by cauterization at the sphenopalatine foramen (SPF), has been performed by our group. Our study assessed the clinical benefit of endoscopic sphenopalatine foramen cauterization (ESFC) and compared it to ESPAL.
A retrospective study was conducted. Patients who received ESFC for posterior epistaxis from 2016 to 2018 at a tertiary hospital were recruited. Middle meatal antrostomy was done. After ethmoidal crest was identified and nipped, pterygopalatine fossa was entered through the SPF. Sphenopalatine artery (SPA) and its branches within the SPF were cauterized without identification of any SPA distal branches in the nasal cavity. Patients receiving conventional ESPAL by the same surgeon were recruited and compared as control. Patients were followed-up for 3 months. Success rate, operative time, and complication were assessed.
Thirty-four patients were identified. Recurrent epistaxis was absent in 90.0% and 100% of patients receiving ESPAL (9/10 patients) and ESFC (24/24 patients) respectively, p = 0.294. Median operative time was 115 and 60 min, respectively, p < 0.001. Ipsilateral hard palatal or anterior palatal numbness were found in one and three patients, respectively. All resolved spontaneously within 2 weeks.
ESFC is effective in treating posterior epistaxis. It requires significantly less amount of time while the success rate was comparable to conventional ESPAL.
经鼻内镜蝶腭动脉结扎术(ESPAL)已被证实为治疗后鼻出血的有效方法。鼻腔内分支的解剖变异可能导致手术时间延长,以及可能无法充分烧灼。我们的团队对 ESPAL 进行了改良,通过烧灼蝶腭孔(SPF)来治疗。本研究评估了经鼻内镜蝶腭孔烧灼术(ESFC)的临床获益,并将其与 ESPAL 进行了比较。
这是一项回顾性研究。在一家三级医院,我们招募了 2016 年至 2018 年期间因后鼻出血接受 ESFC 的患者。行中鼻甲切开术。确定并咬除筛骨嵴后,通过 SPF 进入翼腭窝。在不识别鼻腔内任何 SPA 远端分支的情况下,烧灼 SPF 内的蝶腭动脉(SPA)及其分支。招募了接受同一位外科医生行常规 ESPAL 的患者作为对照组。对患者进行了 3 个月的随访。评估了成功率、手术时间和并发症。
共确定了 34 名患者。分别有 90.0%(9/10 例)和 100.0%(24/24 例)的接受 ESPAL 和 ESFC 的患者无复发性鼻出血,p=0.294。中位手术时间分别为 115 和 60 分钟,p<0.001。同侧硬腭或前腭麻木分别见于 1 例和 3 例患者,所有患者均在 2 周内自发缓解。
ESFC 治疗后鼻出血有效。它需要的时间明显更少,而成功率与传统的 ESPAL 相当。